Re: Smart-1 Images of the Moon

From: Szaki (szaki10_at_comcast.net)
Date: 01/28/05 

Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2005 16:14:55 -0800

<SPAMtrap@Starry-Nite.net> wrote in message
news:1106843296.500156.216500@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Szaki - I love the idea of roving Luna; it should have been done long
ago!
*Me too!(o:

But - why do you think that it can be done a fraction of the cost of
one Mars mission?
*Be cause, dumping 12 robots on the Moon, don't need 12 missions, can be
done with 1 or 2. Technology is there, 40 years old, we landed "MEN" on the
Moon, that was very expensive.
Easier to fly to the Moon than to Mars.
Controling the robots would be easier because the shorter respons time.

In fact, the costs would be nearly the same, which
is why we have focused on Mars instead. (Given that we only have so
much to spend, which is the more interesting target, Mars or the Moon?)

*Sure, Mars is a more intresting target, but it's too far, too many unknown
facts has to be worked out. Right now, we are happy if can dump a robot
packed in ballons on Mars, uncontroled landing. They promise by 2020 human
mission to Mars, I don't think so.
Moon would've provide constant human presens in space and a hole range of
scientific break throughs dealing with space.

1) The biggest challenge in space exploration is escaping the Earth's
gravity. It takes a similar amount of energy to get from Earth to the
Moon as it does to get from Earth to Mars.

*How about time? Moon vs. Mars?

Any minor savings in fuel
to get there is more than offset by the fact that the Moon lacks an
atmosphere, so that we can't use aerobraking and economical parachutes
and airbags for entry and landing.

*How was the landing done in the 60's on the Moon? Jets, never worked on
Mars. Only the airbag technology worked on Mars, shakes the hell out of your
instruments.

2) The Moon rovers would most likely be similar in design to the Mars
rovers. Where is the cost savings there?

*Savings is in the production, to build the same technology that works, over
and over. Like the way the Russians doing it with their rockets. Constant
experimentation is expansive and dangerous too.

3) As you suggest in another thread, a support orbiter would be a
logical data relay, as well as a recon tool to supplement rover
activities. We already have three sats in orbit around Mars that
provide this support role; your proposed Lunar exploration would
require a sat that does not yet exist, adding to the costs.

*Same vehicle carrying the robots can stay in orbit around the Moon and
perform as a relay to earth. Nothing new in that.
It can carry 5-6 robots in one mission, size of the Sojourner Rover .
At Loral, we packed 6 and 12 GlobolStar satellites into one Soyuz rocket in
one lunch, in 1998.. Well, the first never reached orbit, all others did, 48
total.

Given President Bush's space exploration initiative, I am confident
that we will soon follow a plan of exploration much like what you have
outlined. However, unless we have some breakthrough in economical
pricing of payload to orbit, the costs of exploring Luna will be
similar to what we have invested into exploring Mars.

*Shot down the Space Shuttle, too expensive. I know would heart national
pride, but use what works.
JS

Relevant Pages

  • Re: We choose to go to the moon
    ... place and the surface of the moon is even worse. ... The telemetry it sends back to Earth can be used to decide on the best course of action - that is pretty much how it is done today. ... Using robots to work in hostile environments where we cannot function is standard practice on Earth. ... On the surface of Mars you need decent sensors and telemetry. ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Smart-1 Images of the Moon
    ... What bugs, men walked on the Moon all most 40 years ago, I was a kid? ... Landing on Mars, yes, that's new, many new problems, new environment, long ... >I don't think he's thought it through, as far as cost is concerned. ... > 1) The biggest challenge in space exploration is escaping the Earth's ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Back to the moon? When?
    ... Everything can be done by robots at a far lower cost. ... "This computer went to the Moon" HP ... On Mars though you need to make engineering ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Back to the moon? When?
    ... Everything can be done by robots at a far lower cost. ... "This computer went to the Moon" HP ... On Mars though you need to make engineering ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: Improved lunar landing architecture
    ... The one other close location in this solar system, ... For example, in the case of water alone, then on the Moon we do not ... On the other hand Mars has tons of water. ... >> will only become another NASA mini-disaster that will set back any ...
    (sci.space.policy)
Loading